Sukhminderjot Bedi v. State Of U.T Chandigarh

CRM-M-74009-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-74009-2025 Date of Decision: 08.01.2026 SXXXXXXXXX BXXX .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF U.T, CHANDIGARH ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL

Present:

Mr. Dinesh Kumar Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. **** H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS seeking directions to the ld. trial Court to record statement of the petitionercompliant through video conferencing in the case CIR No. SC/60/2024 w.r.t. the FIR No. 21 dated 06.02.2024 under Section 10 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Sector-11 Chandigarh. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 15.09.2025, a request was made before the learned trial Court to examine the petitioner/complainant through video conferencing. The said request was opposed by learned defence counsel, whereupon the learned trial Court directed the petitioner to appear in person on 14.11.2025, failing which no further opportunity would be granted for his examination. It is further submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances, petitioner could not Renu Rawat 2026.01.09 13.44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-74009-2025 appear on the said date. Hence, indulgence of this Court is sought for grant of one opportunity to the petitioner to record his statement through video conferencing.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Mr. Manish Bansal, Addl. P.P., U.T., Chandigarh, and Mr. Dixit Bhardwaj, Advocate, accept notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 5.

Mr. Sanal, Advocate, and Ms. Yashika, Advocate, appear and accept notice on behalf of the accused, namely Mehak and Anjali, and have filed their Vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record. 6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited prayer made, this Court is of the view that the evidence of the petitioner-complainant is material evidence. Considering that the petitioner is a resident of Australia and is unable to travel to India to depose, one last opportunity is granted to the petitioner to appear through video conferencing and complete his evidence. It is made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted.

8.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

(H.S.GREWAL) 08.01.2026 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/ reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No Renu Rawat 2026.01.09 13.44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document